Latest Palin News

SPWB Disclaimer

Opinions expressed on this site are solely the responsibility of the site's individual authors and any guest authors whose material is posted here. This site is not authorized or operated by Governor Palin, her staff, or any other candidate or committee.

Sarah Palin To Al Gore: The Climategate Scandal Exists. You Might Even Say It’s Like Gravity: You Simply Can’t Deny It

Posted by Gary P Jackson on December 10, 2009

As you know, Sarah Palin just published a powerful Op-Ed in the Washington Post. In it she calls out Obama and all of the other scam artists who are trying to sell the world a bill of goods that will lead to the destruction of mankind worldwide. First it will be economic destruction, then societal breakdown, eventually leading to the complete destruction of the human race.

All of this is the service of a hoax that is driven equally by greed and sheer lunacy.

As you also know, Al Gore has come out and responded to Sarah’s Op-Ed. I’ll say this, as wrong and dishonest as Al Gore is, unlike most of the democrat/communists, Gore stuck to the subject, no personal attacks. But man is he wrong!

Steven Hayward has a great article in The Weekly Standard on the Climategate scandal. Be sure to check it out.

The response to my op-ed by global warming alarmists has been interesting. Former Vice President Al Gore has called me a “denier” and informs us that climate change is “a principle in physics. It’s like gravity. It exists.”

Perhaps he’s right. Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it.

However, he’s wrong in calling me a “denier.” As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.

Former Vice President Gore also claimed today that the scientific community has worked on this issue for 20 years, and therefore it is settled science. Well, the Climategate scandal involves the leading experts in this field, and if Climategate is proof of the larger method used over the past 20 years, then Vice President Gore seriously needs to consider that their findings are flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.

Vice President Gore, the Climategate scandal exists. You might even say that it’s sort of like gravity: you simply can’t deny it.

– Sarah Palin

Here’s a recent letter from some physicists to the members of the American Physical Society. Apparently the physicists don’t think the “science is settled.”:

Dear fellow member of the American Physical Society:

This is a matter of great importance to the integrity of the Society. It is being sent to a random fraction of the membership, so we hope you will pass it on.

By now everyone has heard of what has come to be known as ClimateGate, which was and is an international scientific fraud, the worst any of us have seen in our cumulative 223 years of APS membership. For those who have missed the news we recommend the excellent summary article by Richard Lindzen in the November 30 edition of the Wall Street journal, entitled “The Climate Science isn’t Settled,” for a balanced account of the situation. It was written by a scientist of unquestioned authority and integrity. A copy can be found among the items at http://tinyurl.com/lg266u, and a visit to http://www.ClimateDepot.com can fill in the details of the scandal, while adding spice.

What has this to do with APS? In 2007 the APS Council adopted a Statement on global warming (also reproduced at the tinyurl site mentioned above) that was based largely on the scientific work that is now revealed to have been corrupted. (The principals in this escapade have not denied what they did, but have sought to dismiss it by saying that it is normal practice among scientists. You know and we know that that is simply untrue. Physicists are not expected to cheat.)

We have asked the APS management to put the 2007 Statement on ice until the extent to which it is tainted can be determined, but that has not been done. We have also asked that the membership be consulted on this point, but that too has not been done.

As if to put an exclamation point on the global warning lie, Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air has evidence that “scientists” have falsified data to the point of turning declines in temperatures into increases.

NOAA/GHCN “homogenization” falsified climate declines into increases

At least it did in Australia, where Willis Eschenbach took a look at the raw data to determine what effect the “homogenization” process at the NOAA’s Global Historical Climate Network had on the temperature readings. Like alchemists of old, it transformed decades-long declines in temperature into rapid upward spikes completely unsupported by any of the underlying data. Eschenbach calls this “the smoking gun at Darwin Zero,” and it demonstrates further why the East Anglia CRU (which relied on NOAA/GHCN) conspired to destroy evidence requested in a Freedom of Information demand — and why CRU may have destroyed its raw data archives (via Instapundit and Volokh Conspiracy):

The second question, the integrity of the data, is different. People say “Yes, they destroyed emails, and hid from Freedom of information Acts, and messed with proxies, and fought to keep other scientists’ papers out of the journals … but that doesn’t affect the data, the data is still good.” Which sounds reasonable.

There are three main global temperature datasets. One is at the CRU, Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, where we’ve been trying to get access to the raw numbers. One is at NOAA/GHCN, the Global Historical Climate Network. The final one is at NASA/GISS, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies. The three groups take raw data, and they “homogenize” it to remove things like when a station was moved to a warmer location and there’s a 2C jump in the temperature. The three global temperature records are usually called CRU, GISS, and GHCN. Both GISS and CRU, however, get almost all of their raw data from GHCN. All three produce very similar global historical temperature records from the raw data. …

Then I went to look at what happens when the GHCN removes the “in-homogeneities” to “adjust” the data. Of the five raw datasets, the GHCN discards two, likely because they are short and duplicate existing longer records. The three remaining records are first “homogenized” and then averaged to give the “GHCN Adjusted” temperature record for Darwin.

To my great surprise, here’s what I found. To explain the full effect, I am showing this with both datasets starting at the same point (rather than ending at the same point as they are often shown).

YIKES! Before getting homogenized, temperatures in Darwin were falling at 0.7 Celcius per century … but after the homogenization, they were warming at 1.2 Celcius per century. And the adjustment that they made was over two degrees per century … when those guys “adjust”, they don’t mess around. And the adjustment is an odd shape, with the adjustment first going stepwise, then climbing roughly to stop at 2.4C. …

Intrigued by the curious shape of the average of the homogenized Darwin records, I then went to see how they had homogenized each of the individual station records. What made up that strange average shown in Fig. 7? I started at zero with the earliest record. Here is Station Zero at Darwin, showing the raw and the homogenized versions.

Yikes again, double yikes! What on earth justifies that adjustment? How can they do that? We have five different records covering Darwin from 1941 on. They all agree almost exactly. Why adjust them at all? They’ve just added a huge artificial totally imaginary trend to the last half of the raw data! Now it looks like the IPCC diagram in Figure 1, all right … but a six degree per century trend? And in the shape of a regular stepped pyramid climbing to heaven? What’s up with that?

Those, dear friends, are the clumsy fingerprints of someone messing with the data Egyptian style … they are indisputable evidence that the “homogenized” data has been changed to fit someone’s preconceptions about whether the earth is warming.

Or, in the Climategate parlance, hide the decline. If what Eschenbach says is true — and he’s looking at the raw data — Australia hasn’t warmed at all, except in the fevered imagination of the GHCN. Did the CRU use the raw data or adjusted data to reach its conclusions? Since they’ve destroyed their raw data, we won’t ever know. But what we do know is that the “adjusted” data looks nothing like the raw data, and the rapid warming is as artificial as the thoroughly discredited “hockey stick” graph that started the AGW hysteria in the first place.

Is the Earth warming? Yes, since 1650, as Eschenbach reports. Is that warming trend natural? Perhaps, perhaps not. In order to make that determination, we need a completely transparent data set, one that is free of “adjustments” from advocates masquerading as scientists. As long as the current set of alchemists remain in control of the raw data, their work should be considered completely unreliable.

It’s obvious that Sarah is right to call out Gore and all of the other crooks and cranks who are pushing the global warming hoax. Like gravity, evidence is overwhelming that crooked “climate scientists” exist, and you simply can’t deny it.

We are very glad to see Sarah speak out on this because she is the one person with the gravitas on this issue, as well as the power, to cut through the clutter, and be heard. Sarah is the one person who can bring all of this to the nation’s attention.

So far, the corrupt Obamacentric media will not report on any of this. You have to read news from Canada or the United Kingdom to get the truth. Other than Fox, the American media has been completely silent on one of the biggest scandals in history, truly the greatest lie ever told.

And remember, this isn’t just a lie, this is a lie that will effect the lives of every man woman and child on earth. This is a lie that will destroy economies. This will destroy entire industries. Billions of people worldwide will become unemployed. Their radical environmental policies will cause billions world wide to starve to death.

We are seeing it now as we turn food into ethanol. There are shortages world wide because of this, and because farmers are growing fuel instead of food, food prices on the most basic of staples have risen dangerously high.

We’ve seen this kind of hysteria before. Back in the 1960’s the loons decided that DDT was the worst substance known to man, even though the “science” used was as faulty as it could possibly be.

A woman named Rachelle Sklar wrote a book called Silent Spring. Like Gore’s book, An Inconvenient Truth, Sklar’s book was filled with half truths and out and out lies. The bottom line is this, DDT was banned.

Now DDT is one of the greatest chemicals ever invented…. Seriously…. The guy who figured out DDT was a great pesticide won a Nobel Peace Prize. This of course is when that prize actually meant something.

DDT is very effective at killing mosquitoes. Mosquitoes, of course, carry malaria.

From a piece called: The Five Most Ridiculously Over-hyped Health Scares Of All Time:

# 1 DDT:

If you’re looking for another reason to hate that hippie friend of yours that won’t shut up about the plight of every plant, animal and insect in danger of extinction, DDT is a good place to start.

Widely considered the first major victory of the environmentalist movement, DDT was banned from use in most applications thanks to a series of insanely half-assed scientific experiments and a book about birds. That book, Silent Spring, was released in 1962 and argued that DDT was not only a carcinogen, but also damaging to wildlife and, especially, certain birds. The public, upon hearing about the possibility of having to live in a world without peregrine falcons and ospreys, did what it does best in situations like this–they lost their minds without a second thought.

Soon, pesticides were the cause du jour for environmentalists and average folks that believe whatever the hell they read, and DDT was banned in 1972. The problem was, the science quoted in the book was all kinds of faulty. One scientific study that purported to show that DDT exposure led to a higher incidence of leukemia in mice was later proven to be more than a little tainted. Turns out, the mice in the experiment were fed moldy food that contained aflatoxin, a known carcinogen. When the test was repeated minus the rancid food, the test results were exactly the same, except without all of the leukemia and stuff.

As for the birds, Audubon Society studies showed that 26 different kinds of birds actually increased in population during DDT’s heyday. In cases where bird populations did decline, it was revealed that in most cases the decline began either well before widespread use of DDT began or years after it was banned. Environmentalists dispute the findings, but on the other hand … who gives a **** about the damn birds? Especially considering …

In 1972, DDT killed fewer people than …

Freaking malaria.

See, what many people don’t know about DDT is that the person who discovered that it could be used as a pesticide actually won a Nobel Peace Prize. Why? Because it was kind of effective in fighting malaria. When spraying of DDT stopped in Ceylon (present day Sri Lanka), malaria cases rose from 17 in 1963 to 2.5 freakin’ million in 1969, an increase of approximately a bajillion fofillion percent. And to this day, the mosquito remains the deadliest killer Mother Nature has to offer, with a confirmed 2 million kills per year.

But, hey at least there’s a lot more ospreys around.

Here is a real world example of why anytime someone is out there shouting and screaming like their hair is on fire, and is trying to get you to buy into their fantasy, PEOPLE DIE! Millions of them!!

Right now, if you turn on one of the TV channels that push the “green” religion like an episode of the 700 Club, you know the ones, you’ll be bombarded with ads from charities that are raising money to buy mosquito nets in bulk and send them to Africa, where millions die each and every year from malaria!

In other words, primitive 13th century technology for the 21 century. It’s truly criminal when you consider that DDT is a perfectly safe chemical that was proven to kill mosquitoes and basically wipe malaria off the face of the earth!

This would be exactly like banning polio, smallpox, or other vaccines we all routinely are give when we are kids. Can you imagine the outcry if “scientists” claimed that such beneficial vaccines should be banned, based on dubious research!

And speaking of childhood, and DDT, when we were kids growing up in the mid-sixties in our small Texas town, the city came around once a week with a pick-up truck that had a fogger mounted in the back. This old Dodge truck would go down each and every street in town during the season, spraying DDT. We didn’t have a mosquito problem.

We did have, and still do have a HUGE problem with big black birds that make a mess everywhere! They were unaffected by the “evil” concoction!

You can read about all 5 of the most ridiculously over-hyped health scares that have effected our lives over time. All of them because of loons like Al Gore and Rachelle Sklar, each and every one of them with absolutely zero science or facts to back them up. But….READER WARNING….there is some “colorful language” included, so if you are easily offended, you probably shouldn’t click here.

This global warming hoax has real world implications to Americans. The regulations that being proposed will destroy our economy. It will see pretty much every manufacturing job in the country go away. The democrat/communists have moaned and groaned for decades that the “evil Republicans” send jobs overseas. Of course, like just about everything they say and do, it’s a lie. It’s usually policies thought up by the democrat/communists that have seen companies go somewhere else for cheaper labor and a friendlier business environment.

Even more dangerous than losing millions of jobs, at a time where unemployment is at Jimmy Carter levels, these coming EPA regulations will basically shut down our energy production. No coal, that’s a given. But oil and even clean natural gas, will see severe restrictions on both exploration and production.

Our national security is already at great risk because we depend on so many aggressor nations for oil. This dependence will only, to quote Barack Obama, “skyrocket!” We already send between $700 billion and $1 trillion a year overseas to aggressor nations to buy crude oil. We are not only sending a significant amount of treasure out of our nation, by doing so, we are funding our enemies who in turn use this treasure to wage war against us in any numbers of ways.

All of this is pure insanity. It’s why people like Al Gore, Obama, and all of their disciples need to be stopped. They are criminals. Al Gore is the Bernie Madoff of the climate change movement, and should be treated accordingly. Barack Obama is committing nothing short of treason with all of his actions against this nation and it’s people.

While you think about all of this, and what you know in your hearts must be done to bring these criminals to justice, re-read this from Sarah:

Former Vice President Al Gore has called me a “denier” and informs us that climate change is “a principle in physics. It’s like gravity. It exists.”

Perhaps he’s right. Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it.

However, he’s wrong in calling me a “denier.” As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.

What Sarah says is common sense. OF COURSE the climate changes! In most parts of the world we have fairly well defined seasons of winter, spring, summer, and fall. And believe me, as a Texan, it’s not impossible to experience all four of these seasons in one 24 hour period!

Climate change is real to the extent that weather happens. But to suggest that man has the ability to truly effect it in any measurable way is nothing but arrogance and folly.

If there truly was some danger, monies would be far better spent on adapting to the changes, not heading down the road of economic and societal destruction as we are now.